In Praise of Diversity

The diversity of terrestrial life is beyond complete inventory: with more than a hundred thousand plant species and still counting; more than a million animal species, including 400,000 beetles, with perhaps millions more still to be named; and microbial forms estimated to range in number between ten million and a billion, with tens of thousands of species identifiable in a single gram of soil.

And species themselves are diverse. That is obvious in cultivated plants and animals with which we are familiar: a handful of bean species come in over 40,000 varieties; dogs, pigs, hens and pigeons all come in many shapes, colors and sizes. Great variability exists also in species in the wild as is clearly true of that species with which we are most familiar, which is to say, ourselves.

Human diversity is the result of dozens, hundreds or thousands of generations of separate development during which selection, random genetic drift, and mutation have created the fascinating variety of human form, physiognomy and physiology; the photographic representation of which, in the pages of the National Geographic, undoubtedly accounts for the enduring popularity of that publication.

Technically, any group of organisms that has long interbred with little gene exchange outside the group, will evolve to become a genetically unique race. The races of mankind, therefore, cannot be defined by some single marker such as skin color. In fact, skin color is a singularly useless indicator of race, there being greater diversity among the tribes of black Africa than throughout all remaining humanity, whereas groups of vastly different racial composition may be similar in skin pigmentation.

Rather than differences in just in one or two superficial visible traits, races differ in gene pool composition, the differences reflecting the presence or absence of particular genes and the frequency of occurrence of other genes. Races of an organism thus differ from one another in many ways, often subtle, the significance of which is generally impossible to assess, although many must be adaptive differences of benefit to the groups concerned.

Thus, rather than being divided into clear-cut and discretely separated racial blocks, human populations are related to one another as the branches of a family tree, but with many cross connections as groups have split, or in some instances merged or at least shared genes, as the result of migrations and conquests.

Within groups of any size, interbreeding though potentially free, is impeded by barriers of class, caste, or geography and local events of migration or settlement. Thus within any large racial group, there exist sub groups that may be further divided down to the level of tribe, clan and extended family.

Despite the fuzziness of racial distinctions, the populations of the nations of the Earth are mostly distinct from one another. In some cases, relatively homogeneous population may be spread among several nations. Conversely, political boundaries have often been established without consideration of race, with the result that many states incorporate members of more than one racial group. Moreover, the recently established settler nations, the US, Canada, and Australia among others, are highly racially heterogeneous, possessing citizens of almost every major racial category on Earth. In time, populations of mixed-race countries will tend to coalesce to form a new race. Although initially these mongrel races will have an unusually heterogeneous genetic composition, in time that heterogeneity will be whittled down through various selective processes.

As a resident of a multiracial state, I understand the enthusiasm of some for racial diversity. Folks of all kinds can make good neighbors, workmates or relatives. But enthusiasts for diversity should remember that miscegenation destroys diversity. The result of miscegenation may be a hardy breed, but that breed will not display the original diversity.

So those who value human diversity should understand that American-style racial homogenization on a global scale would be a disaster. Which means that true lovers of diversity should demand the right of every race for a homeland where it may fulfill its unique racial, cultural and religious destiny. For the European peoples, already crowded on a small continent, mass immigration means genocide, which is already evident in cities such as London, Birmingham and Leicester where the English have been made a minority in their own home. Likewise, across Western Europe, where the Danes are projected to become, like the English, a minority in their own country before the end the present century. Only a radical program to end mass migration to the European continent and to stem the mass migrations from Eastern Europe to the West, can prevent this genocide from reaching completion.

In North America, the indigenous peoples have been targeted for extinction or assimilation for hundreds of years, yet still they exist as separate, poverty-stricken and welfare dependent communities. And still they persist in demanding independence and self-government. Canada is a big place. Establishing the 600 Indian first nations with a high degree of independence on a land base of sufficient size to generate a viable economy will be difficult, though not, as I have discussed elsewhere, impossible.

The fate of many other indigenous peoples hang in the balance, as the corrosive influence of cultural and economic globalization sweeps the world. It is time that the defenders of diversity quit loving it to death. Instead they should work in aid of those people who wish to remain distinct as they are. Once lost, human diversity will never be restored.

[…] 100,000 years ago and which, as it spread across the globe, underwent further evolution to yield the morphological and physiological diversity evident in the many races, tribes and nations of modern […]